More Statistics on the Federal Fuel Tax and why the Earmark Rhetoric is Overblown

From statistics I have found based on average fuel consumption in the United States is approximately 140 billion gallons a year according to 2006 numbers. That number may have decreased some a couple years later when fuel hit a high of $4 a gallon in some places, but it surely has stayed consistent or moved back up when fuel prices dropped again. It's the number I am going to use to further demonstrate why this battle against earmarks is meaningless political rhetoric aimed at the angry American voter.

The federal fuel tax is 18.4 cents per gallon. This 18.4 cents per gallon is supposed to be used to build and maintain roads in the United States. Most of the time, a Congressman notes road repairs or improvements needed in his or her district, and instead of creating a national debate over these improvements, they earmark the project using the funds from the fuel tax.

This is constitutional since Article One Section Eight of the Constitution provides Congress the power to build roads. Obviously roads also play an important role in our national defense.

Do the math. 140 billion gallons of fuel all with an 18.4 cent tax attached to it that gets sent to the federal government. Figure it out yet? That totals an incredible $25.76 billion in federal revenue that is supposed to go to building and maintaining roads.

Now if I had my way, this money would never leave the states in which it was collected, because when it leaves the state it was collected, there is the very real possibility it will be redistributed to another state. That is if your Congressman wants to take a no-earmark pledge, another Congressman is going to consume the money your district and state pays into the federal fuel tax for roads in their district.

In fact, I worked with Jeff Wisdom during the 2010 elections discussing his plan to ensure all tax money isn't sent directly to Washington, but is allocated to DC by the state based on population percentage compared to the overall federal budget. It was a beautiful plan that restored states' rights; however, voters vote for meaningless two word phrases more times then they vote for plans that will truly make a difference, which is why we got stuck with Billy Long.

Consider the facts about earmarks. They only total between one to two percent of federal spending. In 2005, in the height of the reckless neocon Congress, total earmarks only totaled $48 billion. Now compare that with the fuel tax revenue from 2006 numbers. Are there too many earmarks, without a doubt. Considering what the fuel tax is set up for and how appropriations for roads are often covered with an earmark, the real trick is balancing the earmark out, eliminating wasteful earmarks while maintaining earmarks the truly work for districts across the United States.

While the earmark deficit compared to the amount of fuel taxes taken in is eye opening, it's a very small amount of debt when you compare it to the unconstitutional entitlements and bureaucracies that are adding to the national debt. Considering 46% of all the world's military spending is by the United States, perhaps we should get that number down to rather than make the claim that ending earmarks is going to create some kind of Washington miracle.

Consider how little earmark spending contributes to the massive federal government, you should be smart enough to realize this earmark debate is simply smoke and mirrors designed to take your mind off the real spending problems coming from Washington. If we are going to make serious cuts to the national debt, we are going to have to get past this earmark debate and cut programs that are truly contributing to the debt.